Okay, Chris told me not to make things too political here, and of course the first thing I’m writing has to do with politics. But it also has to do with sex, so hopefully you’re paying attention anyway. After all, what do college students think about more than sex? Or maybe that’s just me. In any case, read on…
A state representative in South Carolina has introduced a bill that would ban the sale of “devices used for sexual stimulation” throughout the state. Not only would they be banned, it would actually be a felony, punishable by massive fines and five years in prison. Several states already have such bans (shockingly, Utah isn’t one of them–more than likely because, just like SC Representative Davenport, none of our legislators know what a vibrator is); South Carolina would be the fifth in the nation. Right now, the bill is in committee; it remains to be seen what kind of support it will garner.
My thoughts after the jump:
Okay, seriously people, what the hell? You honestly have nothing better to do than worry about whether people are having orgasms? For most people, an inability to have an orgasm is a problem; apparently for a pretty fair number of folks in South Carolina, it’s a goal. God forbid (literally) that anyone actually enjoy themselves outside of Bible-approved missionary-position sex between a married man and woman. The fact that 70% of women can’t have an orgasm solely through some dude spasming on top of them is irrelevant; evidently women aren’t supposed to enjoy sex, they’re supposed to suffer through it so that they can make babies. But I digress. Regardless of whether you’re in any kind of sexual relationship, there’s no shame in enjoying yourself. The only reason people think there is relates to hundreds of years of various religious officials claiming that touching certain parts of your body gets you a one-way ticket to hell, or at least a few decades in Purgatory. I have no problem with religion; you can think whatever you want about masturbation. Just don’t make it the law. And especially don’t make it a felony. The possibility that you could potentially spend more time in jail for selling a dildo than for rape sickens me.
In addition, the language is pretty vague. It would ban all “devices used for sexual stimulation,” but what they’re forgetting is a lot of things can be used for sexual stimulation, especially if you’re creative. I remember a story a couple years back about a Harry Potter toy that got discontinued–it was a vibrating broomstick (meant to be cursed or something) and, well, I’m sure you can figure out what that was being used for. Here’s an exercise: Go to the nearest grocery store, walk up and down the aisles, and try to think of sexual uses for every item you see. Some of you will be better at this than others (and some of you will be disturbingly good), but before too long you should all see what I mean.
What really gets me is that the people trying to ban it don’t even know what it is they’re banning. According to the story, “Davenport admits he doesn’t even know what a sex toy is. Nor does he have a strong opinion about them. The bill, he says, will help the people he represents.” So in other words, this guy has never even seen a vibrator (except maybe in a porno, which would indicate three minutes of furious masturbation followed by an hour of sobbing and six weeks of intense shame), doesn’t know what they’re for, obviously has no clue about sexual anatomy, thinks the clitoris is a ride at Universal Studios, but he does know that the first word of “sex toys” is “sex,” which means banning them will probably reassure his Christian conservative voter base that he fears pleasure just as much as they do.
Another woman quoted in the story says that she would support banning “something that was pornographic or involved children that wasn’t Biblical.” This brings up several questions. First, if something is pornographic and involves children a.) can it be Biblical at all and b.) if so, would she be okay with selling it at her local grocery store? Also, what part of the Bible would that be in? I went to Catholic school, but I slept through class a lot. Second, sex toys are by definition objects. An object cannot be pornographic in and of itself. Hell, a friend of mine has a vibrator that incorporates butterflies; it’s positively adorable. Third, how could sex toys involve children? Out of all the sex toys I’ve ever seen (a surprising and almost unnerving number, really), not a single one of them has incorporated children in any way. Furthermore, in pretty much every place that sells sex toys, you have to be over the age of 18 to enter.
You know what I think the real problem is? Davenport obviously knows very little about sex, sexual aids, or more than likely pleasing a woman. He and his wife are probably both exceptionally dissatisfied with their sex life (if I had to guess, I’d say his wife is probably the more dissatisfied of the two). So let’s help them out, and at the same time give Representative Davenport some “hands on” learning regarding his bill. Any donations coming through the “Buy Me A Beer” button below this story, and this story only, will go toward buying a sex toy for Representative Davenport’s marriage. If I get $25 or less, I’ll buy them something they can use together; if I get between $25 and $50, I’ll get that plus something extra for Mrs. Davenport; if I get more than $50, I’ll buy the first two plus something extra for the good Representative himself (yes, they make sex toys for dudes too). Thankfully, the South Carolina legislature, in its infinite wisdom, has seen fit to put their members’ mailing addresses online. So help me help the good, God-fearing, dildo-loving people of South Carolina.
Questions? Comments? Toy suggestions? Leave them below.